I'm not saying she CAN'T...

I don't know how many people has seen Tropes vs. Women in Video Games? If not, I will provide a link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6p5AZp7r_Q . Now, I really don't have a problem with her video....okay I have an issue where she got a lot of money on kickstarter and yet this episode is rather plain... it looks like the usual episode. I dunno, maybe she'll spend the project money on some of the later episodes and maybe that's why it's taking so long. That isn't my gripe, really, it's focusing on something I noticed with her that annoys the feck out of me. She sometimes plays the damsel in distress.......and then on YouTube disables comments.

Now the damsel in distress thing is because one of the things she talks about is how the internet is mean to her. They threaten her and call her mean names. Now the internet is the greatest and most terrible place ever. You can meet the nicest people and horrifically terrifying people. A lot of people who express any sort of opinion, male and female, have the same attacks done to them. She's not the only one. However, most of these threats are hot air, and the ones that seem serious she should contact the police about it. Considering that I just follow her on YouTube and she doesn't allow anyone to comment on her videos, I don't get to see how mean the world is to her....so... I should just take her for her word on it? Now, don't get me wrong, she shouldn't be attacked for the things she says. People can disagree with her, but they shouldn't threaten her...but trolls be trolling and she needs to focus on people with actual arguments and talk to them, ignore the assholes, and grow a thicker skin. There's no crying in baseball.

Now her disabling voting and comments in her YouTube? This she is free to do. It's her page (kinda.. it's YouTubes..but it's her account) and she can do what she wants. However, I think it's kinda bullshit. I think it could limit discussion..yes there will be arseholes.. but there will also be legit people who want to talk about the video with Anita, and there's no guarantee she'll answer her messages. However, even if I do think it's the actions of a wimp, sorry..I do...I fully understand it's her right to do it. She can but she loses some respect in my eyes.

Also, I thought she'd be addressing sexism in the video game community, which is much more prevalent than sexism in video games themselves. Ah well.

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Here's what Wikipedia says:

Why Don't You/Yes But

The first such game theorized was Why don't you/Yes, but in which one player (White) would pose a problem as if seeking help, and the other player(s) (Black) would offer solutions (the "Why don't you?" suggestion). This game was noticed as many patients played it in therapy and psychiatry sessions, and inspired Berne to identify other interpersonal "games".

White would point out a flaw in every Black player's solution (the "Yes, but" response), until they all gave up in frustration. For example, if someone's life script was "to be hurt many times, and suffer and make others feel bad when I die" a game of "Why Don't You, Yes But" might proceed as follows:

White: I wish I could lose some weight.

Black: Why don't you join a gym?

White: Yes but, I can't afford the payments for a gym.

Black: Why don't you speed walk around your block after you get home from work?

The secondary gain for White was that he could claim to have justified his problem as insoluble and thus avoid the hard work of internal change; and for Black, to either feel the frustrated martyr ("I was only trying to help") or a superior being, disrespected ("the patient was uncooperative").

Superficially, this game can resemble Adult to Adult interaction (people seeking information or advice), but more often, according to Berne, the game is played by White's helpless Child, and Black's lecturing Parent ego states.